Re: making GNU ls -i (--inode) work around the linux readdir bug

[Ian Jackson]

Paul Eggert writes ("Re: making GNU ls -i (--inode) work around the linux 
readdir bug"):
> Tony Finch <address@hidden> writes:
> > Also, readdir(3) is not the only part of POSIX that needs clarifying.
> 
> I participated in the discussion that resulted in this new d_ino
> wording being added to POSIX, and my recollection is that the common
> behavior where readdir returns the inode number of the underlying
> mount point is now considered to be a bug,

_Why_ is it considered a bug ?  Is it just that the members of the
relevant committee didn't understand what d_ino was for, and its
inherent limitations in the absence of a the corresponding dev ?

Were there any examples of applications that are broken near a
mountpoint with the traditional behaviour but correct with the new
behaviour ?

> If there's any further question about this it might help to track down
> the relevant Austin Group discussion.

Do you have a reference ?

Ian.